Trying to get my goat, eh Tom? :)
Tom Schaefer wrote:
>
Ok, I'll bite, and I'll be objective about it, too!
>
> There's nothing like going back thru a Solaris 2.5.1 x86 install to help
> you appreciate and realize several of Linux's greatest strengths.
Don't forget the weaknesses: Just now getting threads, nevermind
lightwieght
processes! Anyway, installation? Hmmm, In don't recall having near the
problems with installation that you've had Tom. The major problem with
Linux installations that I've had deal with the amount of choices, "is
this package really necessary? does it negate the utility of another
package?"
I guess why I never had hardware problems is that I followed Sun's
Hardware compatibility list to the letter. Now why is Linux hardware
support better than Sun's (or at least more comprehensive)? One reason
that I can see:
1: Linux has a HUGE devolper base. don't have a driver you need? Write
it. The source code is right there an your hard drive? Sun doesn't
provide it's source code for free, Sun is a business entity.
>
> Because of some work I'll be doing for a client, I have to set up a
> drive in my workstation at home with Solaris. A good friend of mine was
> kind enough a while back to trade me an old SCSI adapter I had for an
> extra copy he had of Solaris 2.5.1.
Aww shucks :)
> Just to boot up the system, I had to download and create 8 new "Driver
> Update" diskettes. (Driver Update 10) So I boot up the system, and they
> begin their own style of autoprobing hardware.
What's the diff in recompiling your kernel to build in added support?
Nada, zip zilch, takes time.
>
> After the hardware probing is done, you are sitting at a character mode
> install system designed to ask you the basics about your display, video
> adapter card and mouse. This is the Solaris "kdmconfig" program.
> (Keyboard Display Mouse Config) . You have the option of bypassing the
> graphical config, and do your initial install in character mode, so that
> you can install OpenWindows later with kdmconfig,or continue right into
> graphical config. that would be nice except you have to know several
> magin words and invoke some ancient chants to get kdmconfigto work
> right. What a pitiful piece of software it is.
Works very well for me. Tom, the above is bullshit, you're just
impatient :)
>
> If you want to install the graphical environment, OpenWindows, then a
> few screens are offered to allow you to pick from lists the closest you
> can to that which is in your system. then they attempt to load up
> OpenWindows. This is akin to XF86Setup "attempting to start X server" -
> except that if it fails, you have to start over from a reboot. Maybe
> Sun's people are hanging out in Redmond now ...
>
> I selected the ATI Mach 64, a no-brainer for XFree86 under Linux. I have
> wasted considerable effortjust trying to get the video modes and monitor
> set, which, like I said before is not real hard under XF68Setup, and
> makes even xf86config look like a walk in the park.
>
> The sad part of it all is that I did indeed download the latest driver
> kit from Sun, and although it "looks" like they've supplied the right
> drivers, their installer can't get it right. There is no Ctrl-Alt- - or
> Ctrl-Alt-+ mode switching to test different modes, and even Windows NT
> does better autoprobing during the install process.
>
> Several times I have picked the wrong modes, and wound up with garbage
> on the screen, and the system frozen, with no ability to breakout of the
> process, only to have to hit the reset button and go thru the first 3
> SLOW diskettes to get the installer to see and start the CD based
> installer.
Did you attempt to read your manuals on what the ATI was capable of,
then run thru kdmconfig?
> The only solution was to take out the Mach 64 (bummer!) ad re-install an
> older Cirrus Logic video card. And even worse, although Solaris showed
> EXACTLY the card I have, it still isn't quite right! I'm getting weird
> screen refresh problems! It's amazing! I've never had these problems
> with Linux!
Nope, just RTFM ;)
> Linux and the contrib software from seasoned developers and industry
> professionals makes Linux so much more compatible in Intel than any
> other x86 Unix.
>
> I have a rather generic system, Intel motherbaord, real Pentium P133 -
> this is not bleeding edge, Adaptec 2940 PCI adapter, 64mb of memory,
> 2S1P on motherboard, Triton 430HX chip set, sheesh this thing is text
> book. I have an industrial strength 19" rack mount case with an awesome
> power supply. I'm not doing anything real unusual with hardware!
>
> In this same system I have run several different versions and
> distributions of Linux without any of the video or hardware problems I
> have had with Solaris.
>
> And we haven't even gotten to the part about that which NOT included
> with Solaris! :) Can you believe they don't have a "traceroute"
> program included? Can you believe that they start up the "routed"
> program (routing) by default? And how about the fact that they don't
> include any of the tonnage of apps that you find under Linux. "Well
> that's because since they're commercial, they can't include freeware"
> Bullshit. A supplementary CD would be a no-brainer to include.
Uh, no traceroute? Untrue, it's built into "ping" as "ping -sRv host"
> The same friend I got Solaris 2.5.1 from went through ppp hell also, as
> it seems that Sun never really "finished" the job with their
> implementation of ppp. He wound up building a Linux gateway machine
> just for ppp! And I don't believe you get IP Masquerading or Kernel
> based firewalling in the Solaris kernel like you do with Linux. Perhaps
> they include it in their $20000 firewall.
Untrue here, I had PPP going 2 years ago, granted Linux is easier to
configure for PPP NOW, but even then, it was no bed of roses.
I use linux now as an experimental box, as I want to work on cheap
firewalling. Masquerade is very nice. I applaud the linux community
fir this excellent piece of software.
> So next time someone starts laying the "Sun Religion" on you, or the
> fact that you're better off with a "commerical" Unix vs Linux,
> understand that these people are masochists. In my experience as a
> computer professionaI, I have encountered "Sun-only" "Solaris
> Pharisees" who bow down at the great pyramid of Sun and hail it as the
> total solution, even though it is so incomplete and requires so much
> "fixing" and "grooming" to make it usable.
Completion is in the eye of the beholder, Tom. I like both Solaris and
Linux. I started REALLY playing with Linux back about '93 or so, then
moved to Solaris because it was more in line with my job (Solaris
Sysadmin), linux could provide concepts, but for the specifics I needed
Solaris. Now I use both. Use the proper tool for the job :)
> The fact that the top three enterprise databases only run on commercial
> Unix is probably one of the few things that keeps commercial Unix alive.
> Sybase is getting ready to port to Linux, and will probably be first to
> market, although the boneheads at Informix have been pummled for 18
> months by a very dedicated developer core who want informix to go Linux,
> but top management at Informix just can't "get it".
>
> Things not included with Solaris - these you'll have to go get for Sun
> include:
>
> * A decent shell - Sun's shells suck compared to bash - this really
> pisses me off. Sun bigots who think that ksh and csh or even tcsh are
> good shells..
Define decent :) Korn is great if you know how to use it.
> Add time to download and install Bash for Solaris ...
> * A working ppp configuration and software: prepare to give an
> inordinate amount of time to getting it to work if at all!
Not really, the install has gotten easier, but I still recommend getting
the ppp ported from linux, it's faster.
> * C compiler, unless you don't mind paying $1500 for a single user C
> compiler license. That means you'll have to spend time downloading an
> installing the
> GNU compiler.
Okay, got me there, but then I have to spend time getting GCC. Oh well,
I knew life was tough.
> * A decent desktop window manager that doesn't suck like OpenWindows -
> looks like more download and compile time again ... CDE is not really an
> answer, so don't try to impress me with CDE, it's not complete. There
> are better alternatives.
Again, CDE is nice IF you know how to use it. Otherwise, it can be a
real bitch.
> * Oh - and since I have 2.5.1, that means I'm faced with a 25mb
> Recommended Patch cluster download to get it current.
Nope, you can go to SSunsolve adn download just the patches you need. A
person RARELY needs all the patches.
> I know, I could subscribe to their developer program at $95/year, but
> since I can't afford to buy any apps for this os, I really don't want to
> sink money into a very limited program that only covers the os, not
> simple support for apps. The good folks at SuSE, Caldera RedHat,
> Slackware - they are more than able, capable and willing to provide new
> RPMS for just about any app that the user community wants included in
> their distributions.
> I can afford to subscribe to two Linux distributions now, and every
> quarter I have an up-to-date system and software.
>
> The only thing I think Sun has as an advantage *right now* is that they
> have larger hardware and can handle more CPUs with SMP. That will all
> change now as the new Beowulf (clustered processing) wave starts, along
> with better SMP in Linux.
Maybe, maybe not, it goes back to having the proper tool for the job.
> While I'm sure many are thankful for Sun's contributions to the Unix
> community, such as Java and Tcl/Tk, I can't say much for their x86
> product. Perhaps 2.6 is better, but I really don't want to spend $495
> for it. (Why, just because it has Sun's logo - hell I have Sun mouse
> pads and wrist rest, they have cool art work - that it)
>
> Given time, as more and more technology professionals begin realizing
> the power and economy that Linux provides, they will see that Solaris
> Religion just doesn't make sense. PCs are dommodity items now, and
> thanks to Linux, we have a commodity priced OS that makes commerial Unix
> look bad.
Hmmm, I dunno about that one. For example, I tried linux on my beast box
(Dual P-166, 136 MB RAM, 8 Gig Hard Drive). After booting Linux, I had
approx 1 MB of free RAM to play with. I don't put a lot into my
SysVinit, either. Just the usual networking daemons and stuff necessary
to get Linux up and running. Shows VERY poor memory management.
Solaris on the other hand with CDE, Communicator 4, mysql, GCC, SSH and
a whole slew of other things going on simutaneously, eats about HALF of
that available RAM.
Too bad we can't get the source(s) for memory management.
> Hang your head in shame Sun. Sun shows you what would have happed to
> Linux had it grown up and been fostered in a commercial environment.
Can we say "Commercial?" There I KNEW we could, Tom! Sun is out to make
a buck! Wake up and smell the coffee!
> Oh - an if my pricing is too high - I can hear some of you saying "you
> can get it practically for free under such and such a program from Sun"
> - have you been to their web site lately - they have so many useless
> links connected to nothing but marketing fluff. Just wading through the
> links to find drivers and patches is sheer tedium.
No Argument there! LOL
> So for all you newbies out there - enjoy Linux and the fact that current
> distributions are so much more simple to install and maintain than
> Solaris.
>
> Ask somebody who runs a large IS shop with a lot of Sun machines - ask
> them how support is from Sun - chanes are they'll tell you they don't
> use Sun - they use a VAR or somone else, because Sun has a shjitty
> reputation where support is concerned. The only shops getting attention
> are the big spenders.
> Support for Linux is at light-speed compared to Sun, not to mention
> other Unix vendors.
>
Sun's support has been variable, granted. Sometimes excellent, sometimes
not.
But, it's nice to be part of a group who's a major contributor to Sun's
beta program. Helps to make the finished product a lot nicer.
> Watch out Sun - "The Penguin Cometh" ...
Somehow, I don't see Scott McNealy quaking in his boots just yet.
The whole point of this excersize, I guess, is that Linux is appropriate
in some cases, Solaris in others. But to make a blanket statement that
Solaris x86 is now obsolete due to the advent of Linux is ludicrous.
Economically, Solaris at home does not make sense.
USE THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB!
John Weekley
--
To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with
this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
